Absolutely. Once you divorce the Bible from history, you delegate Christianity to mythology, and Christ becomes yet another mystical member of the peace pantheon of Wise Agéd Ones.
Yes, I believe that the Bible is True Truth. It all really happened, in other words. Knowledge of Truth is an intellectual process, and sponaeous reactions to momentary moods and impulses do not qualify. Faith today means belief in the absence of sufficient evidence. Nobody needed any faith to believe that Christ rose from the dead. They had the evidence of their senses. No "faith," as the word is understood today, was required.
I can't understand why Christians find this so troublesome to understand. After all, the word logos is the root of the word "logic" and all the -ologies.
Mort! I'm a traditionalist and oft times self-described pragmatic realist. I'm a product of a mixed religious background and married to one of yet a third religious persuasion. I only mention this so you may appreciate the breadth of very real exposure to the major world faiths I have. Just for additional background I'll state that long ago I knew that I was, in practicing reality, a Golden Ruler. Needless to say, that is a philosophical persuasion of life and NOT a religion. I have great tolerance and respect for sincere religious belief, but feel that for me a sense of inherent decency and morality in all things works for me. I appreciate your comments, but have ONE bone of contention with part of it. You noted..."They had the evidence of their senses".
This is quite interesting AS it's a matter of interpretation of the event as described in the Bible.
It is NOT a statement of fact, but rather an article of FAITH to be taken as the TRUTH, by true believers, and is CRUCIAL to the roots of Christianity. Would you not agree.
Also, I'd venture this comment on your statement..."Once you divorce the Bible from history, you delegate Christianity to mythology, and Christ becomes yet another mystical member of the peace pantheon of Wise Agéd Ones."
It must also be acknowledged that there is 'world' history and there is 'religious' history and,...though intertwined through the genrations, they are separate and distinct and should NOT be blurred. For what you have stated is PRECISELY what a tolerant non-believer thinks and there is NOTHING wrong with that. The outward civility of one religion's believers towards another's religious belief is NOT an acceptance of that belief but merely a manifestation of tolerance of same. If one TRULY BELIVES in his/her personal religion then as surey as night follows day, they must believe that THEIR'S is the only true way. In other words, when pushed to the wall they DO NOT belief that All Roads Lead To Rome!